Sorry. It is time for a rant. I donât do this oftenâbut here goes. I hate the trend of leaders gaslighting managers by bombarding them with calls to "get into the details" or âgoing deepâ (sometimes in public, on podcasts). The statement blames managers for not getting into the details instead of taking into account (and taking responsibility for) the environmental factors that made it difficult to do so.
In my YEARS of experiencing this, I don't think I've seen it so well described. Add to it a ridiculously broken data set where there lies no hope of retrieving factual numbers on literally anything, no drive to fix it other than throwing untrained internal resources at it, and no public recognition that it is in fact irreparably broken.
"We have the data! Just ask the metrics team to pull it for you! I don't understand why it's so hard!" - Leader
"No we can't pull that.. the data is all messed up. No I can't tell the Leader that.. i'll get fired. Ok byeee." - Data team
*silent scream*
Thank you for summing this up so well. I've seen it in 4 startups and counting. I hope people are taking notes. Chances are this is happening in your company today. *points vaguely around the room."
Preach it! Being the ham in a leadership sandwich is cognitive load in both directions. If you manage to skip this variant your team will think you are not deep enough. If you actually go deep like they ask then execs are alienated as they donât have the bandwidth either.
These "leaders" are invariably founders who lack organizational management skills, both in terms of people management and systems thinking. They are in over their heads, but their egos are too big to let anyone tell them how to run a mature organization. Or even read a book about it.
This is never going to get better. Unless the board intervenes and puts a grown up with experience and empathy at the helm, you're best bet is to head for the exit. These mf-ers will burn through people for years like employees are disposable consumables. Run.
A worthwhile rant! Most founders are people with ideas who go about *executing* them. Management on the other hand is about creating the environment where other people can execute and execute well. It frustrates me every time the founder of a company abdicates their job of articulating company strategy, the why behind it, structuring the company to suit it and getting the right people (non-toxic people exhibiting none of the dark triad traits) and holding people, systems accountable. Instead when they preach the 'hire smart people and leave them to it while you go awol' and then blame managers (or anyone), I know it's time to get out as everyone is just looking for a scapegoat!
Wow this resonates! Thereâs a lack of understanding of how important (and hard!) middle management is in pulling everything together, balancing priorities and also coaching people to ensure they are doing great work and are happy - without the people you wonât have anything!
John, if you ever want to go deeper on the line âMeanwhile, a single manager navigating a chaotic orgâŠ.â Iâd love to hear more of your thoughts. Does a complex or chaotic org mostly manifest in a larger than average management layers where direct reports of said managers are doing work, and leadership is saying hereâs where we need to go?
The problem that drives this is ego. I had a really smart CEO who once said he didn't understand why it was so hard to treat customers in two different ways. "If (customer1) action1; else action2; Right? See I understand programming."
He *was* really smart in his chosen field, but to him that meant he was smart in all fields. Rookie mistake.
He was so focused on selling his vision at any cost, he wasn't admitting when he'd gotten it wrong. He therefore was constantly on a mission to find the "bad actors" in the organisation slowing him down.
In my YEARS of experiencing this, I don't think I've seen it so well described. Add to it a ridiculously broken data set where there lies no hope of retrieving factual numbers on literally anything, no drive to fix it other than throwing untrained internal resources at it, and no public recognition that it is in fact irreparably broken.
"We have the data! Just ask the metrics team to pull it for you! I don't understand why it's so hard!" - Leader
"No we can't pull that.. the data is all messed up. No I can't tell the Leader that.. i'll get fired. Ok byeee." - Data team
*silent scream*
Thank you for summing this up so well. I've seen it in 4 startups and counting. I hope people are taking notes. Chances are this is happening in your company today. *points vaguely around the room."
Preach it! Being the ham in a leadership sandwich is cognitive load in both directions. If you manage to skip this variant your team will think you are not deep enough. If you actually go deep like they ask then execs are alienated as they donât have the bandwidth either.
These "leaders" are invariably founders who lack organizational management skills, both in terms of people management and systems thinking. They are in over their heads, but their egos are too big to let anyone tell them how to run a mature organization. Or even read a book about it.
This is never going to get better. Unless the board intervenes and puts a grown up with experience and empathy at the helm, you're best bet is to head for the exit. These mf-ers will burn through people for years like employees are disposable consumables. Run.
A worthwhile rant! Most founders are people with ideas who go about *executing* them. Management on the other hand is about creating the environment where other people can execute and execute well. It frustrates me every time the founder of a company abdicates their job of articulating company strategy, the why behind it, structuring the company to suit it and getting the right people (non-toxic people exhibiting none of the dark triad traits) and holding people, systems accountable. Instead when they preach the 'hire smart people and leave them to it while you go awol' and then blame managers (or anyone), I know it's time to get out as everyone is just looking for a scapegoat!
Wow this resonates! Thereâs a lack of understanding of how important (and hard!) middle management is in pulling everything together, balancing priorities and also coaching people to ensure they are doing great work and are happy - without the people you wonât have anything!
John, if you ever want to go deeper on the line âMeanwhile, a single manager navigating a chaotic orgâŠ.â Iâd love to hear more of your thoughts. Does a complex or chaotic org mostly manifest in a larger than average management layers where direct reports of said managers are doing work, and leadership is saying hereâs where we need to go?
100%.
The problem that drives this is ego. I had a really smart CEO who once said he didn't understand why it was so hard to treat customers in two different ways. "If (customer1) action1; else action2; Right? See I understand programming."
He *was* really smart in his chosen field, but to him that meant he was smart in all fields. Rookie mistake.
He was so focused on selling his vision at any cost, he wasn't admitting when he'd gotten it wrong. He therefore was constantly on a mission to find the "bad actors" in the organisation slowing him down.
Now I have to find how to build this lego set. Dammit
I read your recent rant and it sounds very relatable. Recently, I have started exploring Stafford Beer's book "The Brain of the Firm" and its description of the Viable System Model. The problems you described seem to fit well into this. For instance, your example of managers being overwhelmed by tasks and dependencies can be seen as a failure in System 1. Whereas your description of leaders using clichés to deflect blame can be seen as a failure of System 5.
I'm curious to hear if you've explored the works of Beer and use the VSM yourself to look at problems?
100%. Nothing is more frustrating as a manager.
Related, I just published an article about how companies make the product job much harder than it should be: https://www.productleadership.io/p/hot-take-product-management-isnt